MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066833606 · doi:10.1001/jama.296.12.1479

Prediction of Germline Mutations and Cancer Risk in the Lynch Syndrome

2006· article· en· W2066833606 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sining Chen, Wenyi Wang, Shing Yip Lee, Khédoudja Nafa, Johanna Lee, Kathy Romans, Patrice Watson, Stephen B. Gruber, David Euhus, Kenneth W. Kinzler, Jeremy R. Jass, Steven Gallinger, Noralane M. Lindor, Graham Casey, Nathan A. Ellis, Francis M. Giardiello, Kenneth Offit, Giovanni Parmigiani, for the Colon Cancer Family Registry

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteSidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer CenterJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsLynch syndromeMedicineMSH6Microsatellite instabilityGermline mutationGenetic counselingPenetranceEndometrial cancerMLH1MSH2ConcordanceGenetic testingColorectal cancerFamily historyOncologyConfidence intervalInternal medicineMutationCancerDNA mismatch repairGeneticsMicrosatelliteBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Identifying families at high risk for the Lynch syndrome (ie, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) is critical for both genetic counseling and cancer prevention. Current clinical guidelines are effective but limited by applicability and cost. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a genetic counseling and risk prediction tool that estimates the probability of carrying a deleterious mutation in mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6 and the probability of developing colorectal or endometrial cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: External validation of the MMRpro model was conducted on 279 individuals from 226 clinic-based families in the United States, Canada, and Australia (referred between 1993-2005) by comparing model predictions with results of highly sensitive germline mutation detection techniques. MMRpro models the autosomal dominant inheritance of mismatch repair mutations, with parameters based on meta-analyses of the penetrance and prevalence of mutations and of the predictive values of tumor characteristics. The model's prediction is tailored to each individual's detailed family history information on colorectal and endometrial cancer and to tumor characteristics including microsatellite instability. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ability of MMRpro to correctly predict mutation carrier status, as measured by operating characteristics, calibration, and overall accuracy. RESULTS: In the independent validation, MMRpro provided a concordance index of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.88) and a ratio of observed to predicted cases of 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.05). This results in higher accuracy than existing alternatives and current clinical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: MMRpro is a broadly applicable, accurate prediction model that can contribute to current screening and genetic counseling practices in a high-risk population. It is more sensitive and more specific than existing clinical guidelines for identifying individuals who may benefit from MMR germline testing. It is applicable to individuals for whom tumor samples are not available and to individuals in whom germline testing finds no mutation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations386
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207